These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

454 related items for PubMed ID: 24311702

  • 1. The risk of radiation-induced breast cancers due to biennial mammographic screening in women aged 50-69 years is minimal.
    Hauge IH, Pedersen K, Olerud HM, Hole EO, Hofvind S.
    Acta Radiol; 2014 Dec; 55(10):1174-9. PubMed ID: 24311702
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme.
    Heyes GJ, Mill AJ, Charles MW.
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Mar; 79(939):195-200. PubMed ID: 16498030
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Radiogenic breast cancer effects of mammographic screening.
    Gohagan JK, Darby WP, Spitznagel EL, Monsees BS, Tome AE.
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1986 Jul; 77(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 3459927
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Radiation risk and mammographic screening of women from 40 to 49 years of age: effect on breast cancer rates and years of life.
    Mattsson A, Leitz W, Rutqvist LE.
    Br J Cancer; 2000 Jan; 82(1):220-6. PubMed ID: 10638993
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Clinical outcomes of modelling mammography screening strategies.
    Yaffe MJ, Mittmann N, Lee P, Tosteson AN, Trentham-Dietz A, Alagoz O, Stout NK.
    Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):9-15. PubMed ID: 26676234
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. [Radiation risk associated with mammography screening examinations for women younger than 50 years of age].
    Nekolla EA, Griebel J, Brix G.
    Z Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 18(3):170-9. PubMed ID: 18826160
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Mammographic screening: is the benefit worth the risk?
    Faulkner K.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005 Dec; 117(1-3):318-20. PubMed ID: 16464841
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Mammographic screening in BRCA1 mutation carriers postponed until age 40: Evaluation of benefits, costs and radiation risks using models.
    Obdeijn IM, Heijnsdijk EA, Hunink MG, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, de Koning HJ.
    Eur J Cancer; 2016 Aug; 63():135-42. PubMed ID: 27318001
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. The validation of a simulation model incorporating radiation risk for mammography breast cancer screening in women with a hereditary-increased breast cancer risk.
    Greuter MJ, Jansen-van der Weide MC, Jacobi CE, Oosterwijk JC, Jansen L, Oudkerk M, de Bock GH.
    Eur J Cancer; 2010 Feb; 46(3):495-504. PubMed ID: 19945279
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 23.